Newly found species fills evolutionary gap between fish and land animals

EurekAlert (AAAS) ^ | 05 April 2006 | Staff

[Elsie]

(But if you really WANTED a brown slug of plastic...)

[Conservative Texan Mom]

(I think, however, that being truly objective is very difficult. Our point of view tends to color what we see way too much and there's always room for error because there's always some decision made that is just a matter of judgment. Our interpretation is often colored by how we feel, or what we're thinking of at the moment.)


I have thought about this concerning this new fossil. If we found it and put it with the other fossils from the fossil record, would we develop the theory of evolution, or something else to explain why they look the way they do.

[grey_whiskers]

Oh, yes, KP, about your post aeons back which started this "sub-thread"...

I think it's interesting that a variant on that theory was roundly ridiculed...

by two characters in the book The French Lieutenant's Woman...

Cheers!

[jec41]

My Savior rode a donkey and gave His life for me. He is the same One who made the heavens and the earth and all that is contained therein, and still sustains them. Therefore I am not worthy to ride a donkey. I am not even worthy to breathe a single breath of life. But you? Since you hold the key to history and know what is best for the education of all the children in our land, I suppose I should wear knee pads and kneel to your noodley ideology. No thanks. You can be the goat and kiss my grits. I know where I'm going, and it ain't on my own account. As for you, I guess you'll have to settle. Have fun.

You should keep doing what you insist on doing. Refuse any knowledge. You should deny all facts and suppress science so everyone can return to the dark ages where all was faith and belief. I don't know the best for all education but I would accept new knowledge. The only accept you allow is your own opinion. It is possible though not likely that your worst nightmare may come true. Someday someone might observe ID or creation as a fact. As a observed fact, whether by a Deity, God, nature or otherwise it will be explained as a observed fact by science. It will become a thing known.

It will not affect science other than greater acceptance of science. However your philosophy and all others will be devastated. Philosophy may cease to exist. All religions vary and in the end only one or none can be correct. The knowledge of science that you refuse to accept will become the religion that you accuse it to be and will be accepted by most.

[F.J. Mitchell]

A very timely and convenient discovery for the evolutionists, just as their theory was slipping into the abyss of disproved theories.

[jec41]

What does any observer have to evaluate the substance that presents itself to reason and senses? Only a single mind that resides within the observer himself. That makes for messy science.

Maybe you can;t because you have no method. However of 6.7 billion people on earth most agree their are no two exactly the same. However a few deny change and think themselves clones.

[F.J. Mitchell]

Is that a trick question?

[jec41]

I am only stating what science has observed. This is not my opinion.

What was it that science observed? I didn't get it.

[Skywalk]

"I've yet to meet a human that lays eggs, much less hang from trees on its days off, unless you want to discuss the welfare class."

Anyone miss this bit o' racism from the Creationoid PistolPaknMama?

[F.J. Mitchell]

Who notices racism in America. Hell,that would be like being aware of the pull of gravity. (sarcasm aimed at the race baters and their liberal abetors, such as Alan Colmes)

[Conservative Texan Mom]

Well, one guy we know has been married three times. That's not so unusual. His current wife is a doll. His first wife shot him. Fortunately he was a police officer and was wearing a flack jacket, but it still hurt him pretty bad. His second wife had been a part of the Branch Davidian(sp?). She left the group before the whole Waco thing. She tried to kill him three times. One of them she removed something from the steering, and he hit a tree. He had to have hip replacement from that. On another one, she tried poisoning, which he didn't drink. Then she tried it again, by putting it (some ingredient that used to be in ant poison) in coolaid. He used to come in and guzzle the stuff after working outside. Apparently he suspected he'd just drank something not right as soon as he did it. He made himself throw up and then called 911. spent some time in the hospital after that. His now ex wife was having affairs with several other men in law enforcement and the judge. She never went to jail. He was not aware of the first two attempts until she told him about them.BRHe thought the steering had gone out and the car wreck was just an accident.>
This was quite some time ago. The town has grown and changed a lot in the last 10 years.

[jec41]

"I've yet to meet a human that lays eggs, much less hang from trees on its days off, unless you want to discuss the welfare class."

Anyone miss this bit o' racism from the Creationoid PistolPaknMama?

Yeah but I haven't decided which is smarter. Those that lay around and are supported by those working or those working to support those laying around.

[Conservative Texan Mom]

More like kittens now, but still a bit ratty.

[betty boop]

These mixed-bag values were intended to create variance between the movement speeds and styles of the combatants, so that the simulants looked and moved like live extras instead of a bunch of, well, computer-generated simulants.... But... it generated a surprise side effect: some of the simulants FLED the battlefield. The programmers were quite surprised by this behavior."

"Looked" and "moved" seem to be the key words here, milord. There are real things — and there are simulacra of real things, if the experience/testimony of humankind in historical experience might be recognized as material to this dialog.

To suggest that the above statement is in any way aligned with a truthful analytical standard according to which we humans ought to be moving right now, in response to the exigencies of current global realities, strikes me as a bit tendentious. In that it assumes as true (valid) the very thing that remains to be tested, falsified, or "proved." I.e., that simulacra have free will, such that they can, for example, willingly flee a battlefield.

Though it is interesting that cyborgs in this fictional piece reacted the way they did, we have no way of reliably ascertaining, of knowing, why they did so. Are cyborgs "reasonable," strictly speaking?

Somehow I think that C. S. Lewis would have had a field day with the sort of reasoning presented in the article at the top of this thread....

Oh. I just noticed our little conversation has been removed to the "Smokey Backroom".... How delightful! Thanks so much for writing, King Prout! Good night!

[Sofa King]

yellowdoghunter has dismissed the entire concept without knowing enough to tell the difference (And when I took music appreciation, music theory was covered).

[Conservative Texan Mom]

on post 1082, I forgot to include the assumption of not being aware of the ToE.
So, if we weren't aware of that theory, and came across this, and other fossils, would we develop it or something else to explain the fossils.

Are we making evidence fit the theory?

[grey_whiskers]

We simply recognize the impossibility of reaching any certain conclusion as to whether there are no god, many gods, some gods, one goddess, demi-gods, etc.

...based on reason alone.

Scientific empiricism does not guarantee "truth" (whatever that is), but it is the most effective method known for minimizing and discovering errors. Things which have not been scientifically verified may happen to be correct, but the *level* and *type* of certainty are different.

Anyone who says they are certain is simply emoting.

Not necessarily emoting. There are degrees of trust and confidence (say in the expertise of a pilot or a wine-taster) which, while not as justified as scientific rigor, are not due merely to emotion or chance.

[hosepipe]

[ I just noticed our little conversation has been removed to the "Smokey Backroom".... ]

Thank God.. A cigar and an adult beverage would be nice about now..

[Conservative Texan Mom]

Why do you think religion will lead back to the dark ages? There may be some on these threads that want to deny science. I think others embrace it, but view it differently. As to the case for a creator, designer, director, planner, overseer, CEO, boss man, builder, source of intelligence, engineer, or whatever name one may choose, those who believe in that don't argue for not accepting science, they argue for the possibility that there was a creator of science, and the nature that it uncovers. I think they are just fighting for open mindedness concerning the evidence. It may very well all point to evolution. Or, it may fit the theory because we are viewing it with that intention. Just a thought there.

As to my attempt at inductive reasoning earlier, it was not my opinion. I stated nothing in it that I did not find from a "secular" science website. That is why I posted the links. But, I was mostly responding to the challenge that it could not be done.

I am very careful about arguing only with opinion. If I express my opinion on these threads, It is generally making note of an observation, and not an attempt to debate. I also usually include a statement to the fact that it is an opinion, or a thought, and is supported by no research. It is merely something to think about. I did this in the above paragraph, as you will note.

[Alamo-Girl]

Indeed, thank God for His constant tender mercies!

And I agree with you that self-induced blindness is the worst kind.

Thank you for your reply, dear hosepipe!